Mwanzo wa ufafanuzi wa ubepari ni "umiliki binafsi." Katika kamusi ya Merriam-Webster, ubepari unafafanuliwa kama "mfumo wa kiuchumi unaojulikana kwa umiliki binafsi au wa kampuni wa mali ya uzalishaji." Milton Friedman, mshindi wa Tuzo ya Nobel katika uchumi, alielezea ubepari kama mfano unaofanya kazi wa jamii iliyopangwa kupitia ubadilishanaji wa hiari na ubia huru wa kibinafsi, yaani uchumi wa ubadilishanaji. Kwa mujibu wa mwandishi wa riwaya na mwanafalsafa Ayn Rand, mali yote chini ya ubepari inamilikiwa binafsi. Vilevile, mchumi George Reisman anathibitisha ukweli kwamba ubepari ni mfumo wa kijamii unaotegemea umiliki binafsi. Ensaiklopidia Britannica inatoa ufafanuzi ufuatao: "ubepari, unaoitwa pia uchumi wa soko huru, au uchumi wa ujasiriamali huru: mfumo wa kiuchumi, unaotawala katika ulimwengu wa Magharibi tangu kuvunjika kwa ukabaila, ambamo sehemu kubwa ya njia za uzalishaji inamilikiwa binafsi, na uzalishaji unaongozwa na mapato yanasambazwa hasa kupitia uendeshaji wa masoko." Umiliki wa umma au wa serikali wa njia za uzalishaji, kama vile sekta ya magari au taasisi za kifedha, unapingana moja kwa moja na msingi wa ubepari. Kamusi ya Chambers 21st Century inakataa kwa uwazi umiliki wa serikali katika ufafanuzi wake wa ubepari kama "mfumo wa kiuchumi unaotegemea umiliki binafsi, badala ya wa serikali, wa biashara, viwanda, na huduma za usafiri, n.k., pamoja na ushindani huru na kupata faida." Nafasi ya serikali katika jamii ya kibepari inafaa zaidi katika kudhibiti sekta kuliko kuimiliki. Ukweli kwamba uingiliaji wa serikali kumiliki sehemu ya viwanda unaweza kusaidia kuleta utulivu katika uchumi wenye misukosuko haufanyi uingiliaji huo kuwa hatua halali kutokana na mtazamo wa ubepari. Kinyume chake, hili linaonyesha kasoro kubwa katika nadharia ya ubepari, ambayo inaruhusu aina moja tu ya umiliki, yaani umiliki binafsi.

At the root of the definition of capitalism is “private ownership.” In Merriam-Webster dictionary, capitalism is defined as “an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods.” Milton Friedman, a Nobel Prize winner in economics, characterized capitalism as a working model of a society organized through voluntary exchange and free private enterprise exchange economy121. According to novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand, all property is privately owned under capitalism121. By the same token, economist George Reisman confirms the fact that capitalism is a social system based on private ownership122. Encyclopedia Britannica has the following definition: “capitalism, also called free market economy, or free enterprise economy: economic system, dominant in the Western world since the breakup of feudalism, in which most of the means of production are privately owned and production is guided and income distributed largely through the operation of markets.” Public or state ownership of the means of production such as auto industry or financial institutions is in direct conflict of the foundation of capitalism. The Chambers 21st Century Dictionary explicitly rejects state ownership in its definition of capitalism as “an economic system based on private, rather than state, ownership of businesses, factories, and transport services, etc., with free competition and profit-making.” The role of the state in a capitalist society is more applicable to regulations of industry than owning it. The fact that government intervention to own part of the industry may lead to the stabilization of a turbulent economy does not make this intervention a valid move from the perspective of capitalism. On the contrary, this reveals a notable defect in the theory of capitalism which allows only one form of ownership, that is, the private ownership.

Wakati mgogoro wa kifedha na kiuchumi unapofikia kiwango ambacho serikali inaingilia kati na kuchukua baadhi ya taasisi zinazoyumba ili kuzuia kuporomoka kwa uchumi kwa kiwango kikubwa, basi hali ya ubepari kama mfumo inaibua maswali. Hapa linajitokeza tatizo lifuatalo. Ikiwa ubepari utaachwa ufanye kazi kwa kufuata nadharia na kanuni zake za soko huru, ujasiriamali huru na kujiendesha wenyewe, basi kuanguka kwa taasisi za kifedha kufuatiwa na kushindwa kwa mfumo mzima wa kiuchumi kunaweza kuwa jambo lisiloepukika. Ikiwa serikali itaingilia kati na kuhamisha umiliki wa binafsi kuwa umiliki wa serikali na wa umma, basi msingi wa mfumo wa ubepari utakuwa hatarini.

When financial and economic crisis reaches a point where the state interferes and takes over some of the failing institutions to prevent a wide-scale collapse of the economy, then the plight of capitalism as a system is questionable. The following dilemma emerges. If capitalism is left to operate under its own theories and principles of free market, free enterprise, and self-maintenance, then a collapse of the financial institutions followed by a failure of the entire economic system may become inevitable. If the government interferes and transfers the private ownership to state and public ownership, then the foundation of the system of capitalism is in jeopardy.

Mwenyekiti wa Benki Kuu ya Marekani, Bernanke, alieleza kwa uwazi kiini cha mgongano wa ubepari pale aliposema: "Kama Bear Stearns ingeruhusiwa kufilisika, athari mbaya ya kushindwa kulipa madeni isingebaki ndani ya mfumo wa fedha tu, bali ingeonekana kwa upana katika uchumi halisi kupitia athari zake kwa thamani ya mali na upatikanaji wa mikopo"47.

Federal Reserve chief Bernanke clearly identified the dilemma of capitalism when he said, “If Bear Stearns had been allowed to fail, the adverse impact of a default would not have been confined to the financial system but would have been felt broadly in the real economy through its effects on asset values and credit availability”47.

Katika mzozo wa kifedha wa hivi karibuni, serikali ya Marekani ilichukua umiliki wa sekta kadhaa na taasisi za kifedha. Ilichukua udhibiti wa kampuni kubwa za rehani Fannie Mae na Freddie Mac. Hatua hiyo ya kuchukua udhibiti imeelezwa kuwa "mojawapo ya uingiliaji mkubwa zaidi wa serikali katika masoko binafsi ya kifedha kwa miongo kadhaa,"124 na ambayo "inaweza kugeuka kuwa msaada mkubwa na wa gharama kubwa zaidi kuwahi kutolewa na serikali kwa kampuni binafsi"125. Kwa dhamana zinazotokana na rehani zenye thamani ya zaidi ya dola trilioni 5 ambazo bado hazijalipwa, kuanguka kwa kampuni hizi kungekuwa janga kwa uchumi wa nyumba, uchumi wa Marekani, na uchumi wa dunia126.

In the most recent financial crisis, the US government took over the ownership of several industries and financial institutions. It took over control of giant mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The takeover action has been described as “one of the most sweeping government interventions in private financial markets in decades,”124 and one that “could turn into the biggest and costliest government bailout ever of private companies”125. With over $5 trillion outstanding mortgage backed securities, the failure of these companies would have been disastrous for the housing economy, the American economy, and the world economy126.

Serikali ya Marekani ilichukua udhibiti wa American International Group Inc (AIG), mojawapo ya kampuni kubwa zaidi za bima duniani, katika makubaliano ya dola bilioni 85. Hatua hiyo ilionyesha jinsi serikali ilivyokuwa na wasiwasi mkubwa kuhusu hatari ambayo kuanguka kwa kampuni hiyo kungeweza kuleta kwenye mfumo wa fedha. Kuchukuliwa huku kwa kampuni binafsi na serikali ni jambo la kihistoria katika ulimwengu wa ubepari.

The US government seized control of American International Group Inc (AIG), one of the world’s biggest insurers, in an $85 billion deal that signaled the intensity of its concerns about the danger a collapse could pose to the financial system123. This takeover puts the government in control of a private company, which marks a historic development in the world of capitalism.

Serikali ilipanua umiliki wake wa mali hadi kwenye sekta ya magari. Baada ya kujadili hatima ya sekta ya magari iliyokuwa ikiporomoka katika mahakama za kufilisika, serikali ya Marekani ilinunua hisa 60% za GM na karibu 10% za Chrysler. Sababu inayotolewa kwa kuchukua sekta ya magari ni ile ile iliyotolewa kwa kununua taasisi za kifedha: kuepusha janga kwa uchumi wa Marekani na uchumi wa dunia.

The government extended its property ownership to the auto industry. After negotiating the fate of the failing auto industry in bankruptcy courts, the US government acquired 60% of GM shares and almost 10% of Chrysler. The pretext for the takeover of the auto industry is the same as the pretext for acquiring financial institutions: avoid disaster to the American economy and the world economy.

Ikiwa mgogoro wa kifedha ulithibitisha jambo lolote la maana, basi ulithibitisha kwamba umiliki binafsi wa watu binafsi na biashara peke yake hauwezi kudumisha utulivu wa kiuchumi. Umiliki binafsi peke yake huunda muundo wa kiuchumi wenye nguzo moja, ambao kwa uzito wake wenyewe ni lazima utaanguka. Jambo hili linaonekana zaidi kadiri uchumi unavyokua hadi kufikia ukubwa usiopimika, na uzito wake unakuwa mzito mno kiasi kwamba hauwezi kuendelea kusimama juu ya nguzo moja. Ili kuzuia kuporomoka kabisa, serikali huharakisha kuuunga mkono muundo huo kwa nguzo mbili za ziada: umiliki wa serikali na umiliki wa umma. Ubepari, kimsingi, ni muundo wa kiuchumi wenye nguzo moja. Cha kushangaza ni kwamba ubepari huunda mazingira ambamo ukubwa wa uchumi hukua kwa kasi ya ajabu. Matokeo yake, mgogoro wa ubepari unaendelea kulipuka, ukiyatishia mataifa ya kibepari kujiporomoka kutoka ndani.

If the financial crisis had proved anything of significance, it proved that private ownership of individuals and enterprises cannot sustain the economic stability by itself. Private ownership alone creates a unipolar economic structure which is bound to fail as a result of its own weight. This becomes more evident as the economy grows to virtually large sizes and its weight becomes too heavy to survive on a single pole. In order to prevent a total collapse, the governments rush to support the structure with two additional poles: state and public ownership. Capitalism, essentially, is a unipolar economic structure (a structure with a single pole). The irony is that capitalism creates an environment where the size of the economy grows at a very rapid rate. As a result, the crisis of capitalism continues to explode, threatening the capitalist economies to implode from within.

Nyongeza ya mara kwa mara ya umiliki binafsi kwa umiliki wa serikali na wa umma inaweza kuwa na manufaa kwa kipindi kifupi tu. Hili halitazuia anguko kamili. Sababu ni kwamba umiliki wa serikali unaongezwa kwenye mfumo chini ya shinikizo la mgogoro, na si kama matokeo ya mkakati uliopangwa vizuri unaoonyesha umuhimu na haja ya umiliki wa serikali na wa umma wa sehemu fulani za uchumi. Chini ya shinikizo la mgogoro, serikali inalazimika kumiliki kwa sehemu au kikamilifu sehemu fulani ya uchumi bila hata msingi mdogo wa kinadharia au kiitikadi wa hatua hiyo. Kutaifishwa kwa sehemu fulani ya uchumi kunaupeleka mfumo wa kiuchumi mbali na mwenendo wake wa kawaida bila kubainisha njia au mwelekeo mpya wa uchumi kuufuata. Matokeo yake ni uchumi usio na tabia iliyo wazi: si ubepari wala ujamaa. Wala si wa Kiislamu, kama itakavyofafanuliwa katika sehemu inayofuata ya kitabu hiki.

The sporadic augmentation of private ownership with state and public ownership can prove effective only for a short period of time. This will not prevent a total collapse. The reason is that state ownership is added to the system under the pressure of the crisis and not as a result of a well-thought strategy which reveals the necessity and importance of state and public ownership of certain segments of the economy. Under the pressure of the crisis, the state is forced to partially or completely own a segment of the economy without the least theoretical or ideological justification of the move. The nationalization of a particular segment of the economy pushes the economic system away from its regular course without defining a new path or course for the economy to pursue. The end result is an economy without a well-defined character: neither capitalism nor socialism. It is not Islamic either, as will be explained in the next part of this book.

Kwa madhumuni ya kumbukumbu za kihistoria, ni jambo la kuvutia kutambua kwamba ujamaa wa Kisovieti ulipata upotoshaji kama huo kutoka katika mkondo wake wa kawaida pale umiliki binafsi ulipoingizwa katika mashamba ya pamoja ndani ya sekta ya kilimo. Hili lilianzishwa wakati wa enzi za mwishoni mwa Stalin na Khrushchev ili kuongeza tija ya wakulima na kuepuka upungufu mkubwa wa chakula. Marekebisho zaidi katika mwelekeo huu yalianzishwa chini ya mipango ya perestroika ya Gorbachev. Hoja hapa si kama marekebisho na mabadiliko haya yana manufaa au la; hoja kuu ni kwamba haya yanaunda upotoshaji mkubwa kutoka katika mwelekeo wa awali wa mfumo wa kiuchumi. Marekebisho kama haya husababisha mfumo kupoteza sifa yake kuu. Ujamaa kama mfumo ulishindwa kabisa katika Umoja wa Kisovieti wa zamani na nchi za Ulaya Mashariki. Sababu moja kubwa ya kushindwa huko ilikuwa upotoshaji kutoka katika mkondo wake wa kawaida wa utekelezaji.

For the sake of historical reference, it is interesting to note that Soviet socialism experienced similar deviation from its normal course when private ownership was introduced to the collective farms within the agricultural industry. This was introduced during the late Stalin and Khrushchev eras to increase the productivity of farmers and avoid a serious shortage of food supplies. More reforms in this direction were introduced under the Gorbachev perestroika plans. The argument here is not whether these modifications and reforms are useful or not; the main argument is that this constitutes a major deviation from the original course of the economic system. Such modifications cause the system to lose its main characteristic. Socialism as a system failed altogether in the old Soviet Union and the Eastern Europe countries. One major reason for the failure was the deviation from its normal course of action.

Vivyo hivyo, ubepari leo unakabiliwa na haja ya haraka ya kubadilisha njia yake na kurekebisha mwelekeo wa utendaji wake kwa kuingiza umiliki wa serikali na wa umma katika mfumo, ingawa kwa njia isiyo ya kimfumo. Kanuni za soko huria hazidhibiti tena peke yake mtiririko wa mali na uzalishaji wa bidhaa na huduma. Kanuni za uhaba wa jamaa na utaratibu wa bei zinaelekea kufifia na kuwa zisizo wazi kufuatia uingiliaji wa mara kwa mara wa serikali katika uchumi. Sifa za muda mrefu za uchumi wa kibepari, hasa ukuaji na utabirika, haziwezi tena kudumishwa kutokana na kuingizwa kwa vipengele vipya vya kibinafsi katika kanuni zinazoongoza uchumi wa soko huria. Leo, kanuni za soko huria zinaonyesha mwelekeo mmoja katika sekta ya mali isiyohamishika, wakati umiliki wa serikali wa kampuni kubwa za rehani unalazimisha bei katika mali isiyohamishika kuelekea upande mwingine.

By the same token, capitalism today suffers from the urgent need to change its route and modify its course of action by introducing state and public ownership to the system, although in a nonsystematic manner. The rules of the free market are no longer the only rules that control the flow of wealth and the production of goods and services. The principles of relative scarcity and the price mechanism tend to blur and become vague in the wake of government sporadic intervention in the economy. The long-lived characteristics of capitalist economy, especially growth and predictability, can no longer be sustained due to the inclusion of new subjective factors in the formulas governing free market economy. Today, free market rules point to one direction in the real estate industry, while the government ownership of major mortgage companies force the prices in the real estate to point in another direction.

Kwa muhtasari, dalili mbili kuu za kushindwa kwa uchumi wa kibepari ni kuundwa kwa uchumi pepe juu ya uchumi halisi, na kupotoka kutoka kanuni za soko huria kwa kuanzisha umiliki wa serikali na wa umma pamoja na umiliki wa binafsi. Uchumi pepe huunda udanganyifu katika uchumi unaoruhusu jumla ya utajiri kuonekana kuwa mkubwa zaidi kuliko thamani yake halisi. Udanganyifu huu umewezekana kutokana na biashara za soko la hisa, ambazo hunufaika kwa kutumia thamani za jamaa za vitu, kwa kuruhusu pesa kukua kupitia riba/riba ya kiasi, kwa kuitenganisha pesa na msingi wa dhahabu, na kwa kuikatisha pesa na nguvu ya kiuchumi ya nchi. Uchumi pepe kwa hakika utaporomoka na kurejea kwenye thamani za kawaida za uchumi.

In summary, the two major signs of failure of the capitalist economy are the creation of virtual economy on top of the real economy and the deviation from the rules of free market by introducing state and public ownership alongside the private ownership. Virtual economy creates an illusion in the economy which allows the total wealth to appear much larger than its real worth. This illusion was made possible by the stock market trades, which exploit the relative values of things, by allowing money to grow through interest/usury, by detaching money from the gold base, and by disassociating the money from the economic strength of a country. The virtual economy is bound to crash and return to the normal values of the economy.

Kuanzishwa kwa umiliki wa serikali kunasababisha mkanganyiko wa kanuni za soko huru na kupotoka vibaya kutoka katika mwelekeo wa awali wa ubepari.

The introduction of state ownership leads to the confusion of the free market rules and to a serious deviation from the original course of capitalism.